ReviewThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2016
Duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy in people with cystic fibrosis.
Review in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.
- Duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy in people with cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Is there a multinational consensus of tobramycin prescribing and monitoring for cystic fibrosis? Survey of current therapeutic drug monitoring practices in USA/Canada, UK/Ireland, and Australia/New Zealand.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2024Article
- A comprehensive overview of the cystic fibrosis on the island of São Miguel (Azores, Portugal).BMC pediatrics · 2020Review
- The future of cystic fibrosis care: a global perspective.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2020Review
- Review
- Optimising Antibiotic Usage to Treat Bacterial Infections.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Cephalosporin Allergy: Current Understanding and Future Challenges.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practiceReview
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRespiratory disease is the major cause of mortality and morbidity in cystic fibrosis. Life expectancy of people with cystic fibrosis has increased dramatically in the last 40 years. One of the major reasons for this increase is the mounting use of antibiotics to treat chest exacerbations caused by bacterial infections. The optimal duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy is not clearly defined. Individuals usually receive intravenous antibiotics for 14 days, but treatment may range from 10 to 21 days. A shorter duration of antibiotic treatment risks inadequate clearance of infection which could lead to further lung damage. Prolonged courses of intravenous antibiotics are expensive and inconvenient and the incidence of allergic reactions to antibiotics also increases with prolonged courses. The use of aminoglycosides requires frequent monitoring to avoid some of their side effects. However, some organisms which infect people with cystic fibrosis are known to be multi-resistant to antibiotics, and may require a longer course of treatment. This is an update of previously published reviews.
objectivesTo assess the optimal duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy for treating chest exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals, abstract books and conference proceedings.Most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 05 May 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing different durations of intravenous antibiotic courses for acute respiratory exacerbations in people with CF, either with the same drugs at the same dosage, the same drugs at a different dosage or frequency or different antibiotics altogether, including studies with additional therapeutic agents. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No eligible trials were identified. MAIN
resultsNo eligible trials were identified. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere are no clear guidelines on the optimum duration of intravenous antibiotic treatment. Duration of treatment is currently based on unit policies and response to treatment. Shorter duration of treatment should improve quality of life and compliance; result in a reduced incidence of drug reactions; and be less costly. However, this may not be sufficient to clear a chest infection and may result in an early recurrence of an exacerbation. This systematic review identifies the need for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing different durations of intravenous antibiotic treatment as it has important clinical and financial implications.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.